innovation shock in industrial companies; Identifying factors and consequences with the FCM method

Subject Areas : Creativity and innovation from psychological, epistemological, educational and pedagogical

ali shariatnejad ¹ , hanieh hatami ²

1 - Assistant Professor, Department of Business Management, Faculty of Management and Economics, Lorestan University, Khorramabad, Iran
2 - M.Sc. Student, Faculty of Management , Lorestan university, Khorramabad, Iran

Received: 2024-08-08 Accepted : 2024-11-10

Keywords: creativity, innovation, innovation shock, industrial companies,

Abstract :

Purpose: Innovation is a complex, new and emerging phenomenon that brings all kinds of changes. New and complex innovations are based on the way companies look and this phenomenon has positive and negative effects on companies. This phenomenon, which is known as innovation shock, has positive and negative messages for industrial companies when faced with their strategies and plans. Therefore, the current research was conducted with the aim of identifying the factors causing and consequences of innovation shock with the FCM method. Method: This research is applied in terms of purpose and in terms of data collection method, it is survey and exploratory, which has a comparative and inductive research philosophy. The statistical population of the current research is experts, consisting of company managers and managers of research and development departments in industrial towns of Lorestan province, along with university professors, who were selected as sample members using the purposeful sampling method and based on the principle of theoretical saturation. The data collection tool is an interview in the qualitative part and a questionnaire in the quantitative part. The validity and reliability of the tools have been analyzed using content validity and intra-coder-inter-coder reliability for the interview and content validity and retest reliability for the questionnaire, respectively. In this research, the content analysis and coding methods were used in the qualitative part and the FCM fuzzy cognitive mapping method was used in the quantitative part for data analysis. Findings: The results of the research include the identification of diagnostic factors and consequences of innovation shock. Conclusion: The results of this research indicate that the shock of the emerging technological network and disruption of the traditional network, the ability to absorb foreign knowledge created through entrepreneurial orientations and the emergence of disruptive changes in the industry are among the most important factors that cause innovation shock. Also, strengthening and revitalizing the brand and not moving towards stagnation, transforming traditional companies into quantum companies and creating dynamic and adaptable brands with transformative changes are among the most important positive consequences of the innovation shock.

References:

اکبری، مرتضی، ذره پرورشجاع، الهام، پاداش زیوه، حمید، و علیزاده مقدم، شکوه السادات. (1397). تأثیر نوآوری باز واردشونده و خارج شونده بر عملکرد نوآوری در شرکت های فناوری اطلاعات و ارتباطات. مدیریت توسعه فناوری، 6(2 )، 157-184
Argyres, N., Bigelow, L., & Nickerson, J. A. (2015). Dominant designs, innovation shocks, and the follower's dilemma. Strategic Management Journal, 36(2), 216-234.
Park, S., Kim, H. K., Lee, H. J., Choi, M., Lee, M., & Jakovljevic, M. (2023). Strategic management and organizational culture of medical device companies in relation to corporate performance. Journal of Medical Economics, 26(1), 781-792.
Aungst, T. D., Patel, R., Pugliese, R., Patel, I., & Boutari, C. (2019). From ideation to practice: How pharmacists and students can leverage hackathons and innovation labs to accelerate innovation in pharmacy. Journal of the American Pharmacists Association, 59(2), S25-S29.
Liu, H. (2022). Socio-emotional wealth, innovation environment, and innovative investment path of family enterprises: implications for environmental accountability. Journal of Environmental and Public Health, 2022.
Harif, M. A. A. M., Nawaz, M., & Hameed, W. U. (2022). The role of open innovation, hotel service quality and marketing strategy in hotel business performance. Heliyon, 8(9).
Bigelow, L., Nickerson, J. A., & Park, W. Y. (2019). When and how to shift gears: Dynamic trade‐offs among adjustment, opportunity, and transaction costs in response to an innovation shock. Strategic Management Journal, 40(3), 377-407.
Khurshid, F., Park, W. Y., & Chan, F. T. (2019). Innovation shock, outsourcing strategy, and environmental performance: The roles of prior green innovation experience and knowledge inheritance. Business Strategy and the Environment, 28(8), 1572-1582.
Bonciani, D., & Oh, J. (2023). Uncertainty shocks, innovation, and productivity. The BE Journal of Macroeconomics, 23(1), 279-335.
Argyres, N., J. Mahoney, and J. Nickerson (2018). Strategic Repositioning in Response to Shocks: Comparative Adjustment Costs, Transaction Costs, and Opportunity Costs. forthcoming Strategic Management Journal.
Ahmad, M., Khan, Z., Rahman, Z. U., Khattak, S. I., & Khan, Z. U. (2021). Can innovation shocks determine CO2 emissions (CO2e) in the OECD economies? A new perspective. Economics of Innovation and New Technology, 30(1), 89-109.
Felin, T, &Zenger, T. R.(2014). Closed or open innovation? Problem solving and the governance choice. Research Policy , 43(5) , 914-925.
Santos_Vijand,M,L,& Alvarez_Gonzalez,L.I.(2007). Innovateness and organizational innovation in total quality oriented firms:The moderating role of market turbulence. Technovation,27(9) ,514-532.